It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Chemtrails - an evil swiss army knife??

page: 1
7
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 06:26 PM
link   
I have just been handed a copy of issue 25 of Uncensored - a New Zealand magazine dedicated to conspiracy theories. It's pretty cheap - NZ$9.90/AU$8.00 is about US$8.40 I think - so if you want the full article you should buy a copy through the website.

Unfortunately the article "Chemtrails Fact Sheet" on page 25 is not available electronically, but I thought it fascinating all the things that chemtrails are able to achieve.

I'm retyping it all, so my apologies for any spelling or grammatical errors introduced!

At the top there's a definition from NASA -


NASA's defintion of a contrail is "]stratopheric ice particles momentarily condensated by engine exhaust heat, like a wake behind a boat".


I can't find this definition anywhere on the 'net, and it is not the same as the definition from NASA's Contrail Education page -


What are contrails?

Contrails are clouds formed when water vapor condenses and freezes around small particles (aerosols) that exist in aircraft exhaust. Some of that water vapor comes from the air around the plane; and, some is added by the exhaust of the aircraft.
The exhaust of an aircraft contains both gas (vapor) and solid particles. Both of these are important in the formation of contrails. Some elements of the exhaust gasses are not involved in contrail formation but do constitute air pollution. Emissions include carbon dioxide, water vapor, nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons such as methane, sulfates (SOx), and soot and metal particles.


Then there's a definition of chemtrails:


Chemtrails on the other hand are generally sub-micron particles of light reflecting hydroscopic (water attracting) materials being deliberately ,added to our atmosphere that linger for hours, days or even weeks.


-a pretty normal sort of definition for chemtrails I suppose.

Then comes the real meat - a series of short paragraphs telling us some of the uses for chemtrails -


Chemtrails are also an effective delivery system for testing military-grade microbes on unsuspecting civilian populations, such as "mycoplasma fermentens incognitus", "mycoplasma pneumonia", "morgellons disease", the new "super staph", and the many mystery illnesses now afflicting the general population.


So why isn't any of this stuff (that is the stuff that we know does actually exist - no need to include Morgellons) showing up in air samples??


And how come Morgellons is now a "military-grade microbe? Why can't anyone find these microbes? What is "military-grade"??

And BTW "mycoplasma pneumonia" is not actually a microbe - it is a disease - caused by mycoplasma pneumoniae - a small point, but I feel one should be accurate when scaring the be-jeezuz out of people!

Next:

chemtrails are also a way of plasmatising the air for the development of scalar and psychotronic weaponry as well as earthquake generation technology (H.A.A.R.P.).


Ohhhhhkkkkaaayy........

Well it's stuff I've seen before - would love to see some evidence for it, but I'm not holding my breath - not even in a smog cloud!


Chemtails were secretly approved by the I.P.C.C. (International Panel for Climate Change) as an emergency response to combat climate change in 1999 after consultation with Edward Teller who suggested dropping 10.5 million tons of aluminium oxide laced with barium salts into the atmosphere annually to help reflect the sun's rays away from the earth. This technique is known as "Teller's sunscreen". Our elected representatives are pacified with this secret knowledge, deliberately kept from the general public.


Except the sleuths of the chemtrail community!! OK - that's a pretty specific claim - Teller's suggestion is pretty well known....although the phrase "Teller's sunscreen" gets zero hits on Google......so what's the evidence of this "secret approval" in 1999?

I've never heard of it before so would be most interested in some references.


Although mycoplasma fermentens rarely infected the blood, it was modified in 1994 for experimental vaccine research by Dr Shyh-ching Lo for US Armed Forces Institute of Pathology. The patent registered at the American Registry of Patents described the isolation and cloning of a "Pathogenic Mycoplasma" capable of inducing pneumonia, chronic fatigue, respiratory distress, lupus-like illness, as well as symptoms of AIDS. It was bred on aluminium plates


AFAIK the Patent number is 5,242,820, and it dates to 1993, but what's a year when the fate of the human race is at stake, right?? there seem to be no Patents for tethe inventor of this one for 1994.

You can see it here - dont' see any mention of aluminium (or aluminum) plates tho..
And the purpose seems to be to enable detection of disease.

I'm going to summarise the next para - 6 years after 1994 a new disease appeared - a "flu like illness", in Australia they apparently called it Respiratory-like illness". And mycoplasma bacteria are only 1/10th the size of normal bacteria, require specialist equipment to detect, and are "a favourite among bio-weaponeers".

OK ...so I think they are trying to draw a connection between this patent and a mysterious flu-like illness that they do not actually go to any length to identify. 6 years after 1994 would be 2000 - the article is published in 2011 - is that all there is??


Next:


chemtrails are also a convenient way of disposing of out-of-date & recalled pharmaceuticals and other toxic industrial waste that used to be dumped off the coast in containers until the practice was banned by the USE.P following the East Coast beach closures in 2004.


Dunno what "USE.P" is - perhaps a mistyped "US EPA", and I am unaware of beach closures in 2004.

But I am also intrigued by the possibility of disposing of stuff in "chemtrails" - we've seen it suggested on here once or twice I think, but I do not recall any evidence being presented that it is happening.

Lastly, and of course:


Chemtrails are a key ingredient in USA.F. programme "Weather as a Force Multiplier 2005" which clearly states objectives in drought inducement, stormfront amalgamation, hurricane generation, economic disruption through flood and drought, and last but not least, owning the weather by 2025.


Well apart from the obvious mis-types, there is no such programme. There isa paper examining concepts for weather warfare - which is a fictitious scenario. It's been done to death, but apparently that's not enough for some people.

finally the article includes references to numerous "chemtrail" and "conspiracy" websites - Carnicom, David Icke, Rense, Aircrap, a Morgellons site, Will Thomas's site, some HAARP sites, etc, but unsurprisingly nothing that directly backs up any of the claims made.

But heck - those chemtrails sure look useful - is there anything they can't do??



edit on 27-2-2012 by Aloysius the Gaul because: get excerpt formats right




posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 06:39 PM
link   
Blah
edit on 27-2-2012 by Thisbseth because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 06:39 PM
link   
You know, ive never really been into Chemtrails.

To me its pretty obvious, the exhaust you get from a car is bad enough BUT THE EXHAUST FUMES FROM TWO JET ENGINES IS A TOTAL ATMOSPHERIC NIGHTMARE.

You know?, Jet Fuel is nasty and Stadis is pretty nasty stuff too I mean it has barium in it for christs sake, its not anything you would ever want to inhale, so its not exactly a surprise or much of a conspiracy to realise that burning this stuff in the upper atmosphere IS A BAD IDEA.
edit on 27-2-2012 by Ixtab because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 06:43 PM
link   
Well crap I accedently deleted my last post in edit. Anyway I can get it back?



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 06:49 PM
link   
$8.40 is not cheap for a magazine in the states.

They publish all these claims and give no reference points for them? It does make it hard to debate the subject without credible sources, but... a concept and actions so covert and nefarious wouldn't be "published" anywhere now would it? Maybe in 40 years when they've long abandoned that project, but never during active "testing" will we hear anything "official" about the operations.

The things you quoted do make sense if one is paying attention to what's been happening past 10 years, I've seen this "super staph" 1st hand and felt this was a bio weapon if anything. Not seen any Morgellons myself, but plenty of worsening respiratory illnesses have crossed my path past decade.

As for prescription medications, I personally was directed to dispose of outdated or discontinued medications via flushing down the toilet. Anyone knows where that water goes? That's still standard procedure in my former line of work. So I don't find it outrageous that they'd disperse medications in the air, they do it to the water supplies, so why not?

None of these things will ever be officially published, they are covert operations, and they don't have to legally disclose anything in the "testing" phases.



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 06:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 





Except the sleuths of the chemtrail community!! OK - that's a pretty specific claim - Teller's suggestion is pretty well known....although the phrase "Teller's sunscreen" gets zero hits on Google......so what's the evidence of this "secret approval" in 1999?


I don´t know if your google is censored, but i got 4.5 million hits on tellers sunscreen... the first one was this www.hoover.org...



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 06:56 PM
link   
I love the thread and the work you put into it but,,,,




It's pretty cheap - NZ$9.90/AU$8.00 is about US$8.40 I think - so if you want the full article you should buy a copy through the website.


From the looks of it,,,,I would'nt give .50 cents for this magazines "info".........$8.00 no way................

Keep up the good work......flag from junkie



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 07:14 PM
link   
reply to post by liejunkie01
 


I might have paid for it...once....just for the sake of having read it.......but this one I got to view for free!

you can always peruse their website of course for more info - it's...um...interesting!!



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 07:21 PM
link   
I am still waiting for the,
aircraft passenger air cabin filter test results.
It should be the most simplistic way to debunk this toxic theory.
Unless there is toxins in the filters,
that those that maintain aircraft,
don't want disclosed.
Of what people are breathing while flying in aircraft as paying customers.
I have done searches on cabin filter test results and have been unable to come up with anything they want to disclose.
So for you the passengers of an airplane,
open those little vents they give you, that shoot in your face,
and you can control the volume, until we can figure this out.



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 07:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


If you type chemtrails in their search on the site you come up with some very interesting articles..


Here are some headlines...


Weather Warfare – Global Depopulation – Chemtrails 2011



Interview with Clifford Carnicom – Chemtrails 2007



Stratospheric Aerosol Geoengineering – Chemtrails 2010


uncensored.co.nz...

I need see nothing more.


Also noticed they love those youtube videos on their site.. Interesting...



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 07:44 PM
link   
Anyway I would look at how they filter cabin air and what they try to filter out.


Donaldson Hydraulic Mist Removal Report quantitative results of tests on Donaldson HEPA Aircraft Cabin Recirculation filters for MD-SO,. MD-90, DC-10, MD—11, Boeing® 737, 747, 757, 767 and 777 ...


www.asia.donaldson.com...





posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 07:53 PM
link   
So what I am seeing is,
it might be more dangerous,
to be on the flight,
by the time you go threw security,
get radiated .
And then add the toxins they try to filter out during the flight,
so it might be more dangerous in flight then on the ground.



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 08:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gmoneycricket
I am still waiting for the,
aircraft passenger air cabin filter test results.


Who are you geting them done by?


It should be the most simplistic way to debunk this toxic theory.


Why? There are numerous tests that show no toxic materials of air all over the world (well at least no unexpected ones) - they don't stop the conspiracy existing...



I have done searches on cabin filter test results and have been unable to come up with anything they want to disclose.


What did you find?



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 08:04 PM
link   
So I have admitted
the toxins released from the plane is minimal and
I am now looking at the possible toxins inside the plane.
With 3.24 tons Co2 per 1 ton of jet fuel the plants take a deep breath and go ahhh.
Now lets look at us that need an oxygen atmosphere.
edit on 27-2-2012 by Gmoneycricket because: ahhh



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by Gmoneycricket
I am still waiting for the,
aircraft passenger air cabin filter test results.


Who are you geting them done by?


It should be the most simplistic way to debunk this toxic theory.


Why? There are numerous tests that show no toxic materials of air all over the world (well at least no unexpected ones) - they don't stop the conspiracy existing...



I have done searches on cabin filter test results and have been unable to come up with anything they want to disclose.


What did you find?


I thought you would be happy that I have admitted they are contrails and not chemtrails, and now you are threaten by the pollutes that appear to come from the plane itself and are mixed in passenger cabin air?
Are aircraft so dangerous that we can not even question the cabin air?
Is that why you have to beg to get to a terminal now?
Consent for the toxins that aircraft disperse.

I admitted it was contrails, with your help, but I see these mocking threads appear.
Make me want to share more truth about how toxic aircraft are.



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ixtab
You know, ive never really been into Chemtrails.

To me its pretty obvious, the exhaust you get from a car is bad enough BUT THE EXHAUST FUMES FROM TWO JET ENGINES IS A TOTAL ATMOSPHERIC NIGHTMARE.

You know?, Jet Fuel is nasty and Stadis is pretty nasty stuff too I mean it has barium in it for christs sake, its not anything you would ever want to inhale, so its not exactly a surprise or much of a conspiracy to realise that burning this stuff in the upper atmosphere IS A BAD IDEA


there's probably more barium in your brake pads than in a load of jet fuel.

Stadis is added to jetfuel at 2 parts per million initially, and can be increased up to 5 ppm as it becomes less effective with age if necessary.

So at 5 ppm that's 0.005 grams per kilo of jet fuel.

I read that the "rule of thumb" fuel burn for a 747-400 is 10 tonnes per hour - 10,000 kg - so that would mean 50 grams of Stadis 450.

But stadis 450 is not 100% barium - in fact we don't know how much barium there is in there precisely, but we do know an upper limit - MSDS fro STADIS 450 - the only things that might have Barium in them are the trade secret polymers - which amount to a maximum of 40%.

But they clearly are not ALL Barium - so for the sake of discussion let's assume they are 50% barium - that means that Barium would comprise 20% of hte total weight of Stadis 450 - so would be 10 grams of that 10,000 kg fuel burn.

So in an hour that jet is 10 grams spread along it's cruise distance of 550-600 miles.

However that fuel burn pales into comparison with what jets burn at takeoff - if they weer "spreading" barium in Stadis 450 then all you would have to do is sample the air at an airport to get a much higher concentration IMO - especially a busy airport like Chicago or La Guardia or Heathrow, where there might be a take off every couple of minutes at full thrust and full fuel burn which might be several times as much per hour (albeit for only a few minutes.

How much barium is there in brake pads?? This document (1mb pdf) lists brake pad compositions that have Barium Sulphate as 15-35% of the mass. I haev no idea what production values are.



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 08:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gmoneycricket
I thought you would be happy that I have admitted they are contrails and not chemtrails, and now you are threaten by the pollutes that appear to come from the plane itself and are mixed in passenger cabin air?
Are aircraft so dangerous that we can not even question the cabin air?
Is that why you have to beg to get to a terminal now?
Consent for the toxins that aircraft disperse.


Huh??


I admitted it was contrails, with your help, but I see these mocking threads appear.
Make me want to share more truth about how toxic aircraft are.


I asked who is doing the testing and what you found ...????

edit on 27-2-2012 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 08:29 PM
link   
I found that enough hyd. oil leaks to be a problem to the passengers.
How much leaks into the air as exhaust?
I still found this thread mocking chemtrails when we know how much petro based pollution comes out of all ends of the system we call airplane flight.
I wanted to stay out of it from now on,
but I see the sarcasm in many threads on here.
So prove to us its harmless air at 30,000 feet as your aircraft that leak fly along.
You are in the industry, you are on the defense.
Stop turning it on those who look up.



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 08:34 PM
link   
It is a weak defense when you can not prove,
that that was no chemicals used to create flight.
And then mock at those that look up,
and claim they see chemicals in flight.



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 08:40 PM
link   
Now lets move on to boats where the exhaust is released in water and not the air.
Do dolphins call that chemtrails and avoid it,
or do the ones that get to ride in the boats mock them and their concerns?
NASA quote from above.

(NASA's defintion of a contrail is "]stratopheric ice particles momentarily condensated by engine exhaust heat, like a wake behind a boat")


edit on 27-2-2012 by Gmoneycricket because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
7
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join